Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Series

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

War powers

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Behavioral War Powers, Ganesh Sitaraman, David Zionts Jan 2015

Behavioral War Powers, Ganesh Sitaraman, David Zionts

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

A decade of war has meant a decade of writing on war powers. From the authority to start a war, to restrictions on fighting wars, to the authority to end a war, constitutional lawyers and scholars have explored the classic issues (war initiation, prosecution, and termination) through the classic prisms (text, history, and function) for a new generation of national security challenges. Despite the volume of writing on war powers and the urgency of the debates in the context of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria, war powers debates are widely seen as stagnant. We introduce a new set of perspectives …


Inadvertent Implications Of The War Powers Resolution, Michael A. Newton Jan 2012

Inadvertent Implications Of The War Powers Resolution, Michael A. Newton

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The constitutional infirmity of the War Powers Resolution has been uniformly demonstrated by more than four decades of bipartisan experience. The Resolution manifestly fails to eliminate the healthy interbranch tensions that are in our constitutional DNA with respect to military deployments. In its context, the override of President Nixon's veto represented little more than a stark act of congressional opportunism. The President's veto message was prescient in warning that the Resolution is dangerous to the best interests of our Nation. This article suggests that the act represents an attempted abdication of the enumerated obligation of Congress to oversee military operations …


An Originalism For Foreign Affairs, Ingrid Wuerth Oct 2008

An Originalism For Foreign Affairs, Ingrid Wuerth

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Legal scholarship on foreign affairs frequently focuses on the Constitution's text and original meaning, but generally does not fully engage debates about originalism as a method of modern constitutional interpretation. For its part, much of the scholarship defending originalism as a methodology has said little explicitly about foreign affairs. This short symposium contribution describes three contemporary normative arguments in favor of originalism - those advanced by Randy Barnett, Keith Whittington, and John McGinnis and Michael Rappaport - and then considers their application to foreign affairs. It concludes that these arguments are at best underdeveloped and at worst weak when it …